When you consider a game, how do you judge it? Maybe you start by considering the genre and whether that fits your tastes? Maybe you consider the value behind the title and its offerings? Perhaps you account for visual flair?
But have you ever asked "Is it good considering the platform?"
Something that I found all too common in the way Wii games were judged in reviews and otherwise was with the phrase "Good for a Wii game". I have to tell you, that phrase made me cringe. Every time.
"Good for a Wii game" implicates some not so flattering things about the Wii. It says that the quality of Wii games, on average, were not all that great. I think we can all agree that implication isn't entirely true, nor entirely false. The Wii had some great titles, but they didn't flow as quickly as on its HD counterparts, thanks both to stronger online communities (and thus more indie titles) and far superior third party support.
I'm not offended by that implication, though. I had fun with many titles on the Wii, but I recognize that the Wii had a quantity issue (quality over quantity, sure, but there's a point when too little quantity is not acceptable) on great titles.
Where the phrase bothers me the most is the implication that this excused games for being sub-par or lackluster. Many titles got away with glaring issues that would never go unpunished in the way they were reviewed or viewed on the PC, PS3, or Xbox 360. It was almost a get out of jail free card to be a half decent game on the Wii. It was acceptance of a lower standard.
If I say nothing else positive about the Wii U, I have to say this; I'm glad to see the phrase "Good for a Wii game" die with it's release. There are a lot of AAA third party titles releasing on the Wii U. Any game will now have to be compared to those titles. No one will say "Good for a Wii U game" because the bar is much higher, with big name titles like Assassin's Creed 3 and Batman Arkham City seeing their own Wii U iterations.
For all the good Wii did, it also brought some quality issues along for the ride. Perhaps now we can move forward and the expanded gaming community can now be more thoroughly introduced to a higher standard. A standard that gravely needs to improve.
[DISCLAIMER: Any political comments will be reported as "Off Topic". I know what the picture is made from, as I shopped it myself. Regardless, politics have NOTHING to do with this blog, so don't do it, please. Furthermore, the picture implies no message, positive or negative about anything political. Thank you]
Microsoft announced its financial results for Q3 of fiscal year 2026, including an update on its gaming Xbox business and more.
Not looking good. Hopefully Asha Sharma is able to turn Phil’s disaster around.
To me it's still quite remarkable how they can cash-in 5.3bn in revenue in a single quarter, since their hardware is basically dead.
The stock mark is what makes Microsoft remarkable, They have convinced every institutional and retail investor to just keep piling money into them. Like many big tech giants they are just a big growing pyramid scheme. As long as people keep dropping money into ETF's that cover the market Microsoft will always be liquid. At the same time it is completely stifling innovation and competition. People need to start being more discreet in how they invest their money as it's killing the system.
Riiiiight because people will just flock back to them for one or two games per year.
15+ years of bad performance is what they call irreparable in business. It is time for them to sell off the assets and get out of entertainment.
These declines are on the back of extra revenue received from releasing games like Forza horizon 5 on PlayStation. So I’m being sarcastic here when I said they should go back to exclusives. Killing off a revenue stream from Ps5 sales will only make things worse
The charity event will be streamed live from Gamescom in August.
Thanks to the slip-up of an artist working on the title, we now have more evidence that a new Injustice game is in the works.
I think the term good for a Wii U was really meant for the Wii controls or the general graphics for obvious reason but I agree saying a game as a whole is good for a Wii game is a bit of an insult really as I have had some fun on the Wii and there are some solid games there that made me have the same amount of fun as if I was playing on my PS3 games.
Thing is, in the case of ME3, some reviews are saying the Wii U version isn't par with those already released.
If this kind of thing keeps up when newer consoles show up the term, "Good for a Wii U game" might be something to wish for.
Wii U needs to stay strong with japanese games like RPG´s and adventure games if it wants gamers attention.
I think the term will be coming back as soon as the real next gen consoles arrive.
All devices have that stigma in one way or another:
This multi-platform game is good for a PS3 game.
The graphics for this exclusive is good for a 360 game.
The title sold well for a PC game.
It's not that any of them are true to the degree that any of those things can be said with any certainty, but when they are repeated by people who don't clarify what they mean when it does matter is what makes such stereotypes stick.